OF 


HON.  RICHARD  YATES,  OF  ILLINOIS, 


ON 


THE  LAND  POLICY  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES,  AND  IN  DEFENSE  OF  THE  WEST, 


A 


DELIVERED 


IN  THE  HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES,  APRIL  23,  1852. 


WASHINGTON:  % 

4 

SHUNTED  AT  THE  CONGRESSIONAL  GLOBE  OFFICE. 

1852. 


i 


LAND  POLICY— DEFENSE  OF  THE 


WEST. 


The  House  being  in  the  Committee  of  the  Whole  on  the  bill 
**  to  encourage  agriculture,  manufactures,  commerce,  and 
‘  other  branches  of  industry,  by  granting  to  every  man  who  is 
‘  the  head  of  a  family,  a  homestead  of  one  hundred  and  sixty 
‘acres  of  land  out  of  the  public  domain,  upon  condition  of 
‘  occupancy  and  cultivation  of  the  same,  for  the  period 
‘herein  specified” — 

Mr.  YATES  said: 

Mr.  Chairman:  I  shall  endeavor,  in  the  few 
remarks  which  I  shall  make  upon  this  occasion, 
to  confine  myself  chiefly  to  the  subject  legitimately 
before  the  committee.  The  consideration  of  this 
bill  very  properly  invites  discussion,  as  to  the 
whole  land  policy  of  the  Government.  Whether 
the  present  policy  as  to  the  public  lands  is  to  be 
continued,  or  whether  Congress  shall  adopt  a  new 
policy,  are  questions  which  are  now  occupying  a 
large  share  of  the  attention  of  Congress,  and  of  the 
country.  In  the  attempt  to  present  my  views  upon 
this  question,  I  am  aware  that  nothing  short  of  the 
presidential  question  seems  to  awaken  the  interest 
of  the  committee,  and  I  almost  shrink  from  the 
effort  to  arrest  its  attention,  by  remarks  upon  the 
appropriate  business  and  practical  questions  which 
it  is  our  duty,  as  legislators,  to  investigate. 

The  constitutional  power  of  Congress  to  make 
grants  of  lands  to  actual  settlers,  or  to  the  States, 
for  the  construction  of  railroads,  has  been  denied 
by  most  of  the  gentlemen  who  have  addressed  the 
committee  against  these  propositions.  I  do  not 
propose  to  discuss  the  question  of  constitutional 
power  at  length.  If  a  question  can  be  settled  by 
precedent,  then  I  think  that  the  right  of  Congress 
to  make  these  grants  may  be  considered  a  settled 
question.  When  the  propriety  of  such  grants 
first  came  before  Congress,  the  question  of  con¬ 
stitutional  power  underwent  a  thorough  discus¬ 
sion.  The  greatest  minds  in  the  country  were 
pitted  against  each  other,  and  I  believe  the  power 
to  make  the  grants  was  finally  conceded  by  nearly 
all.  Most  certainly,  it  has  been  repeatedly  exer¬ 
cised  without  being  called  in  question.  Grants 
for  purposes  of  education,  to  asylums,  to  actual 
settlers,  and  for  the  promotion  of  internal  improve¬ 
ments,  have  been  made  at  sundry  times,  beginning 
with  the  administration  of  Washington,  down  to 
the  present  day.  When  we  have  the  opinions  of 
such  men  as  Mr.  Clay  and  Mr.  Webster,  General 
Cass  and  Mr.  Douglas,  and  nearly  all  the  leading 
men  of  both  parties,  and  especially  the  opinions 
of  the  strict  constructionists  of  the  Constitution, 
including  Mr.  Calhoun,  who  was  ever  jealous  of 
the  exercise  of  any  doubtful  constitutional  power; 
I  say  when  we  have  such  an  array  of  authority  in 


favor  of  this  constitutional  power,  added  to  the 
uniform  practice  of  the  Government,  and  enforced 
by  the  legislation  of  almost  every  Congress,  it 
would  seem  that  this  might  well  be  considered  a 
settled  question.  I  do  not  say  that  precedent  is 
everything,  but  I  do  say  that  the  opinions  of  our 
profoundest  statesmen  and  lawgivers,  expressed 
after  mature  deliberation,  are  entitled  to  high  con¬ 
sideration. 

The  arguments  against  the  exercise  of  this  power, 
relied  upon  by  gentlemen  who  have  addressed  the 
committee,  are  presented  in  their  strongest  light  in 
the  National  Intelligencer  of  this  morning,  and  I 
will  call  the  attention  of  the  committee  to  the  two 
strong  points  taken  in  that  paper,  and  which  I  do 
not  consider  well  taken.  That  paper  says: 

“  The  property  of  ‘  the  people  of  the  United  States,’ 
whether  it  is  money  in  the  Treasury  or  the  public  lands, 
cannot  be  rightfully  used  by  those  who  govern  our  affairs, 
unless  it  is  done  :  in  order  to  form  a  more  perfect  Union , 
‘  establish  justice,  insure  domestic  tranquillity,  provide  for 
‘  the  common  defense,  promote  the  general  welfare,  and 
1  secure  the  blessings  of  liberty  to  ourselves  and  our  pos- 
‘  terity .’  ” 

Now,  if  it  can  be  shown  that  the  passage  of 
this  bill  will  accomplish  any  of  these  objects,  then 
the  “public  lands  maybe  rightfully  used  for  these 
grants  to  the  objects  indicated.”  Now  I  submit 
to  this  committee  the  question,  Is  it  not  for  the 
“  general  welfare”  to  promote  the  settlement 
of  the  public  lands?  Is  it  not  for  the  general  wel¬ 
fare  to  establish  an  independent  yeomanry  upon 
our  broad  and  beautiful  public  domain  of  one 
thousand  four  hundred  million  acres  of  land?  Is 
it  not  for  the  general  welfare  that  we  encourage 
the  agricultural  productions  of  the  country  and 
improve  the  condition  of  our  industrious  poor? 
Is  it  not  for  the  general  welfare  to  discourage 
speculation  in  the  public  lands,  to  fell  the  forest, 
to  make  “the  wilderness  bloom  and  blossom  as 
the  rose,”  and  to  cover  that  mighty  area  of  terri¬ 
tory  extending  from  the  Ohio  river  to  the  Pacific 
ocean,  with  a  population  of  independent  freehold¬ 
ers,  and  to  withdraw  population  from  the  tempta¬ 
tions  and  vices  of  crowded  cities  to  the  purer 
atmosphere  of  rural  life. 

The  same  paper  says: 

“  A  title  by  ‘  actual  settlement  ’  is  absurd,  unless  legal 
policy  may  thus  encourage  hardy  pioneers  to  enter  the 
forest  and  plant  the  footsteps  of  civilization  in  its  dark  re¬ 
cesses.  With  this  view,  however,  what  are  called  ‘ pre¬ 
emptions  ’  may  be  justly  favored  and  protected.” 

The  constitutionality  of  granting  preemptions  is 
not  denied  by  any.  The  consideration  upon  which 


4 


they  are  granted  is  to  encourage  settlement.  Is  it 
not  the  same  “  legal  policy”  to  encourage  that  set¬ 
tlement  by  making  grants  to  the  actual  settler? 
Under  the  preemption  system,  the  settler  often 
has  the  privilege  of  buying,  to  the  exclusion  of  all 
others,  land  at  $1  25  per  acre  worth  ten  times  that 
sum.  He  can  enter  upon  the  public  lands  as  soon 
as  they  are  surveyed,  and  before  they  are  offered 
at  public  sale,  and  purchase  the  same  at  the  Gov¬ 
ernment  price,  though  at  the  sale  others  might  be 
ready  and  willing  to  pay  five  times  that  sum.  If 
the  Government  may  thus  surrender  its  rights  to 
promote  settlement,  may  it  not,  for  the  same  ob¬ 
ject,  grant  lands  worth  $1  25  per  acre,  or  less,  to 
the  actual  settler?  The  principle  is  the  same  in 
both  cases.  It  is  the  same  in  grants  of  bounty 
lands  to  the  soldier,  and  when  the  “  legal  policy  ” 
is  admitted  in  the  one  case,  it  cannot  be  denied  in 
the  other. 

I  call  the  attention  of  gentlemen  to  that  article 
of  the  Constitution  which  provides  that  “Con¬ 
gress  shall  have  power  to  dispose  of,  and  make  all 
needful  rules  and  regulations  respecting,  the  ter¬ 
ritory  or  other  property  of  the  United  States.” 
“  It  shall  have  the  power  to  dispose  of  ” — here  is  an 
unlimited  power.  It  is  not  derived  by  construc¬ 
tion  or  implication — it  is  an  express  power.  The 
manner  of  this  disposition,  and  the  objects  of  the 
appropriation,  are  of  course  to  be  left  to  the  dis¬ 
cretion  of  Congress. 

Mr.  Chairman,  it  is  amusing  to  see  how  certain 
gentlemen  can  find  authority  to  make  appropria¬ 
tions  to  some  objects,  and  at  the  same  time  deny 
any  power  to  make  appropriations  for  other  ob¬ 
jects  of  precisely  the  same  character.  The  gen¬ 
tleman  from  New  York,  [Mr.  Jenkins,]  in  his 
speech,  maintained  that  our  rivers  were  very  prop¬ 
erly  the  objects  of  national  concern,  and  that 
appropriations  for  their  improvement  were  legiti¬ 
mately  within  the  power  of  Congress,  but  stoutly 
denied  that  Congress  had  any  power  to  make 
grants  of  either  money  or  lands  for  the  construc¬ 
tion  of  railroads.  These,  he  says,  are  the  objects 
of  State  concern  exclusively.  Now,  here  is  a 
“distinction  without  a  difference.”  The  only 
difference  is,  that  the  one  is  water,  the  other  iron. 
The  object  of  both  is  to  facilitate  intercourse  be¬ 
tween  the  different  portions  of  the  Confederacy. 
Certainly  communication  by  means  of  railroads 
is  more  direct;  it  is  cheaper,  safer,  and  speedier. 
All  the  operations  of  commerce,  and  all  the  objects 
of  such  a  grant,  can  be  as  well  or  better  carried 
out  by  the  construction  of  railroads  than  by  the 
improvement  of  rivers,  and  therefore  I  can  see  no 
objection  to  grants  of  lands  to  the  State  to  aid  in 
their  construction. 

EXTENT  OF  PUBLIC  DOMAIN. 

There  are  several  specific  propositions  before 
Congress — the  bill  now  pending,  granting  lands  to 
actual  settlers;  the  bill  granting  10,000,000  of 
acres  to  the  States  to  be  applied  to  the  relief  of  the 
indigent  insane;  and  various  bills  granting  alter¬ 
nate  sections  of  the  public  lands  for  the  construc¬ 
tion  of  railroads.  I  am  in  favor  of  the  principle 
contained  in  all  these  propositions.  I  speak  not 
of  the  details  of  these  bills.  If  wrong  in  detail, 
when  the  time  arrives  for  their  consideration  they 
can  be  amended  to  obviate  objections.  I  am  sur¬ 
prised  that  some  of  the  advocates  for  grants  to 
actual  settlers,  and  for  the  relief  of  the  insane, 


seem  to  regard  railroad  grants  as  coming  in  con¬ 
flict  with  them.  Why,  sir,  nothing  can  be  fur¬ 
ther  from  the  fact.  There  is  no  conflict.  There 
are  enough  lands  for  all.  They  cannot  and  will 
not  be  exhausted  for  a  thousand  years  to  come. 
The  following  table  will  show  the  quantity  of 
public  lands,  sold  and  unsold,  the  proceeds  of 
sales,  and  the  grants  and  reservations  of  the  same 
for  all  purposes,  up  to  the  30th  September,  1851: 


Sold . 101.633,930  acres. 

Grants  tor  schools,  &.c .  40,558,978  “ 

For  Deaf  and  Dumb  Asylums .  44,971  “ 

For  internal  improvements .  11,500,395  “ 

To  individuals  and  companies .  279,792  “ 

For  seats  of  government,  &c .  50,860  “ 

For  military  services .  16,019,065  “ 

Reserved  for  salines .  422,325  “ 

Reserved  for  benefit  of  Indians .  3,400,725  “ 

Reserved  for  companies,  corporations,  &.c.  8,955,383  “ 

Confirmed  private  claims .  7,123,903  “ 

Swamp  lands  granted  to  the  States .  27,397,260  “ 

Central  railroad  grant .  3,025,920  “ 


Total  of  acres  unsold  and  unappropriated,  of 
offered  and  unoffered  lands  on  the  30th  Septem¬ 
ber,  1851,  1,399,586,140.53  acres. 

It  appears  from  this  table,  that  in  a  period  of 
seventy  years  only  101,633,930  of  acres  have  been 
sold,  and  that  the  Government  still  has  on  hand  a 
mighty  domain  of  over  thirteen  hundred  millions 
of  acres.  Is  here  not  an  ample  fund  for  all  the  pur¬ 
poses  of  education,  for  the  relief  of  the  insane, 
for  homes  to  the  actual  settler,  and  for  the  pur¬ 
poses  of  internal  improvement? 

GRANTS  FOR  RELIEF  OF  INSANE. 

Mr.  Chairman,  much  as  1  desire  to  see  portions 
of  the  public  lands  appropriated  to  internal  im- 
i  provements,  yet  this  is  not  the  chief  measure  with 
me.  In  my  humble  estimation,  the  first  and  most 
desirable  application  of  the  public  domain,  is  to 
make  ample  provision  for  the  insane,  the  deaf  and 
dumb,  and  the  blind.  The  Government  could  not 
make  a  more  useful  application  of  a  portion  of  the 
public  domain,  than  by  assisting  each  State  and 
Territory  to  endow  an  institution  for  each  of  these 
objects.  The  census  of  1840,  in  a  total  popula¬ 
tion  of  17,069,453  persons  in  the  United  States, 
exhibited  an  insane  population  of  17,457;  and  the 
census  of  1850  in  a  total  population  of  23,267,498, 
gave  an  insane  population  of  27,000.  The  in¬ 
crease  of  the  victims  of  insanity,  is  in  a  ratio  far 
greater  than  the  increase  of  the  whole  popula¬ 
tion.  But,  sir,  the  results  of  proper  medical  treat¬ 
ment  in  institutions  established  for  this  purpose 
have  been  most  gratifying.  Thousands  who  were 
considered  hopelessly  insane  have  been  restored 
to  reason,  and  there  is  every  reason  to  believe 
that  the  frightful  increase  of  this  dread  malady 
may  be  in  a  great  measure  stayed,  if  proper  relief  is 
afforded. 

The  grants  in  favor  of  these  objects,  should  be 
munificent,  and  such  as,  with  the  aid  of  the  States, 
would  place  these  institutions  beyond  the  contin¬ 
gency  of  want.  These  grants  are  not  contended 
for  on  the  ground  maintained  by  certain  political 
economists  of  France,  that  it  is  the  duty  of  the 
Government  to  furnish  direct  subsistence  to  the 
people,  and  which  has  led  her  impulsive  popula¬ 
tion  to  clamor  for  Government  aid,  instead  of  re¬ 
lying  upon  the  surer  rewards  of  honest  industry 
and  persevering  labor.  It  is  upon  the  higher  prin¬ 
ciple  of  duty  to  the  children  of  misfortune,  who, 
by  the  inscrutable  decrees  of  an  overruling  Provi- 


# 


4 


\ 

5 


dence,  are  deprived  of  the  ability  to  procure  means 
of  support  or  education.  There  comes  to  us,  sir, 
an  appeal  from  these  unfortunate  classes  of  our 
population  addressing  itself  to  the  kindliest  sym¬ 
pathies,  the  noblest  impulses  of  the  heart,  as  well 
as  to  the  highest  considerations  of  patriotism.  Yes, 
sir,  from  the  dethroned  intellects  of  the  twenty- 
seven  thousand  maniacs  in  the  land,  the  stopped 
ears  of  the  deaf  and  dumb,  from  the  sightless  eye¬ 
balls  of  the  blind,  closed  forever  to  the  beautiful 
frame-work  of  art  and  nature,  by  which  we  are 
surrounded,  comes  this  appeal. 

No  longer  needing  the  public  lands  as  a  source 
of  revenue,  some  statesmen  of  great  eminence 
have  regarded  their  possession  as  a  curse,  rather 
than  a  blessing.  But  this  depends  upon  the  uses 
to  which  they  are  applied.  If  our  public  domain 
is  discreetly  applied,  it  will  be  an  exhaustless 
fountain  of  blessedness  to  the  people.  And,  if 
Congress  will  look  at  it  aright,  and  will  grant  to 
the  States  a  sufficient  quantity  of  these  lands  to 
endow  these  institutions,  and  to  place  the  means  of 
relief  within  the  reach  of  these  sad  children  of 
misfortune,  it  will  have  accomplished  one  of  the 
noblest  and  most  sacred  objects  in  the  sight  of 
God  or  man.  Much  is  said  about  progress,  but 
this  is  a  sort  of  progress  which  will  prove  incon¬ 
testably  the  Christian  enlightenment  of  the  age,  and 
bind  new  and  bright  glories  around  the  brow  of  the 
Republic.  It  may  be  a  weakness  in  this  business 
age  of  finance,  steam,  and  railroads,  a  sickly  senti¬ 
mentality  perhaps;  yet  I  confess  that  for  appropri¬ 
ations  for  these  sacred  objects  is  my  first  desire, 
and  I  would  rather  see  all  the  projects  for  grants 
of  the  public  lands  fail  than  these.  I  would  have 
each  State,  by  the  aid  of  these  lands,  erect  a  mag¬ 
nificent  edifice,  with  comfortable  and  spacious 
apartments,  adorned  with  the  decorations  of  art 
and  every  pleasing  embellishment;  surrounded  by 
large  inclosures  of  forest  tree,  beautiful  shrub, 
and  blooming  flower.  So  that  if  your  wife,  or 
daughter,  or  mine,  should  ever  fall  victims  to  in¬ 
sanity,  (and  it  is  a  calamity  to  which  all  are  liable,) 
instead  of  being  confined  within  narrow  apart¬ 
ments  and  prison-houses,  she  may  walk  forth  in 
the  light  of  God’s  glorious  sun,  breathe  Heaven’s 
pure  air,  and,  if  her  fancy  choose,  pluck  a  flower 
by  the  wayside. 

Sir,  that  page  of  history  which  shall  record, 
that  the  American  Congress,  in  the  year  1852,  made 
ample  provision  for  these  sacred  objects,  will  be  an 
immortal  page.  And  when  noble  edifices  for  these 
objects  are  erected,  and  these  institutions  are  firmly 
established,  they  will  redound  to  the  lasting  honor 
of  the  Congress  which  made  the  appropriation, 
and  will  be  pointed  to  by  our  children  and  chil¬ 
dren’s  children  from  generation  to  generation,  as 
the  proudest  monuments  of  the  glory  of  the  nation. 

I  cannot  here  forbear  to  refer  to  the  fact,  that  the 
State  of  Illinois,  in  addition  to  her  tax  for  the  sup¬ 
port  of  the  Government,  and  in  addition  to  her 
separate  tax  for  the  payment  of  the  public  debt, 
with  a  spirit  worthy  of  her  people,  imposed  a  sep¬ 
arate  tax  for  the  relief  of  her  insane  and  the  edu¬ 
cation  of  her  blind  and  deaf  and  dumb.  And 
perhaps  three  nobler  edifices  are  not  to  be  found 
in  any  State  than  those  which  she  has  erected — 
the  pride  of  every  citizen,  the  admiration  of  every 
stranger,  and  the  glory  and  delight  of  every  patriot 
and  Christian.  Sir,  what  must  be  the  pleasure 
with  which  every  citizen  of  Indiana  and  Illinois 


reads  the  following  tribute  from  Miss  Dix,  the 
great  philanthropist  of  the  age,  and  the  illustrious 
benefactress  of  her  race.  She  says: 

u  Look  at  Indiana — noble,  clear  sighted  Indiana.  She 
adopted  a  wise  and  noble  policy,  equally  prudent  and  hu¬ 
mane,  and  levied  a  special  tax  for  the  insane,  for  the  deaf 
mutes  and  the  blind  within  her  borders,  at  a  cost  of  more 
than  $200,000.”  “There,  in  that  young  State,  almost 
within  the  shadow  of  hercapitol,  stand  these  monuments 
of  a  Christian  and  enlightened  age,  recording  a  forethought 
and  munificence  which,  under  the  circumstances,  has  no 
parallel;  though  Illinois,  ranging  side  by  side  geograph¬ 
ically,  almost  completes  a  corresponding  page  in  her  his¬ 
tory.” 

The  above  extract  is  taken  from  her  memorial 
to  the  Legislature  of  Maryland.  And,  in  justice 
;  to  my  State,  I  may  say  that  the  expenses  already 
incurred  by  the  State  of  Illinois  for  these  objects 
:  exceed  considerably  the  sum  of  $200,000.  Now, 
sir,  when  it  is  considered  that  both  these  States, 
and  many  others,  are  embarrassed  by  heavy  debts, 
and  that  all  the  States  are  taxed  to  the  utmost  of 
the  ability  of  the  people  to  bear,  it  will  be  seen 
that  this  aid  from  the  public  lands  would  be  most 
timely  and  appropriate,  and  of  the  greatest  im¬ 
portance. 

GRANTS  TO  ACTUAL  SETTLERS. 

Mr.  Chairman,  I  shall  not  go  into  the  discus¬ 
sion  at  length  of  the  bill  under  consideration.  I 
have  for  many  years  entertained  opinions  favorable 
to  grants  of  the  public  lands  in  limited  quantities 
to  actual  settlers.  But  I  humbly  conceive  that 
those  advocates  of  this  bill,  who  oppose  grants  for 
railroads  are  much  in  error;  for  it  is  only  by  open¬ 
ing  roads  through  the  public  lands,  and  making 
them  accessible  to  market,  that  they  are  to  be  made 
desirable  homes  for  the  actual  settler. 

A  better  illustration  of  the  effects  of  the  present 
land  system  could  not  be  given  than  the  declara¬ 
tion  which  has  been  made  by  the  gentleman  from 
New  York  [Mr.  Sutherland]  to  this  committee. 
He  says  that  he  knows,  at  his  boarding-house, 
four  individuals,  who  own  50,000  acres,  each,  of 
the  public  lands.  I  would  ask  that  gentleman,  if 
that  system  is  to  be  considered  beneficial,  which 
tolerates  the  withholding  of  th<?“e  lands  from  set¬ 
tlement  and  occupation  in  the  hands  of  wealthy 
speculators,  to  the  exclusion  and  injury  of  the 
poor  and  industrious  citizens?  Would  it  not  be 
better  to  have  these  lands  in  cultivation,  divided 
into  small  farms,  and  occupied  by  our  industrious 
poor  families,  than  for  them  to  remain  unim¬ 
proved,  and  absorbed  entirely  by  speculators?  Is 
that  a  just  system  which  permits  the  wealthy  spec¬ 
ulator,  who  makes  no  improvements,  to  hold  on 
to  these  lands  until  the  actual  settler,  by  the  im¬ 
provement  of  adjacent  lands,  has  made  them  valu¬ 
able,  and  then  to  charge  him  five  times  the  Gov¬ 
ernment  price  for  them  ? 

The  only  plausible  objection  to  the  policy  of 
these  grants  to  actual  settlers,  which  at  first  struck 
me,  but  which,  I  believe,  has  not  been  advanced 
here,  was,  that  the  effect  would  be  to  depreciate 
the  lands  in  the  hands  of  present  proprietors.  But 
the  reverse,  I  believe,  will  be  the  effect.  The  class 
of  persons,  who  would  go  on  a  quarter  section  and 
occupy  and  cultivate  it  for  five  years  to  get  a  title 
thereto,  would  be  in  the  main  poor  persons,  and 
unable  to  buy  of  present  proprietors.  I  doubt, 
sir,  whether  it  would  make  a  single  purchaser 
less.  The  bounty  land  laws,  which  have  absorbed 
16,019,065  acres,  have  not  had  the  effect  to  reduce 


the  prices  of  lands  already  occupied  and  improved. 
The  effect,  I  think,  would  be  to  increase  prices  to 
present  owners,  by  bringing  into  settlement  and 
improvement  the  public  lands  which  would  other¬ 
wise  remain  in  market  for  sale,  and  which  now 
come  into  competition  with  the  lands  of  present 
owners.  The  prices  of  lands  in  the  hands  of  pres¬ 
ent  owners,  are  unquestionably  kept  down  by 
the  large  quantity  of  the  public  lands  which  are 
subject  to  sale  at  $1  25  per  acre — purchasers  being 
unwilling  to  pay  from  five  to  twenty  dollars  per  acre 
for  improved  lands,  when  they  can  get  them  at  the 
Go  vernrnent  price. 

The  new  States  have  a  deep  and  vital  interest  in 
the  passage  of  this  bill.  They  want  settlement. 
They  want  these  lands  to  pass  out  of  the  hands 
of  the  Government  into  the  hands  of  individuals, 
so  as  to  make  them  taxable,  and  contribute  their 
share  to  the  support  of  the  State  governments. 
The  passage  of  this  bill  would  increase  greatly 
the  immigration  to  the  land  States,  insure  the  set¬ 
tlement  and  improvement  of  the  vacant  lands,  and 
augment  the  capital  of  the  new  States,  which  they 
so  much  need  to  enable  them  to  engage  in  manu¬ 
facturing,  the  construction  of  roads,  and  other 
important  public  enterprises. 

The  General  Government  would  lose  nothing — 
the  settlement  and  improvement  of  portions  of  the 
public  lands  would  increase  the  value  of  the  con¬ 
tiguous  lands  remaining  unoccupied,  and  would 
add  vastly  to  the  aggregate  of  agricultural  pro¬ 
duction  and  national  prosperity. 

But,  sir,  the  highest  consideration  is  the  effect 
which  it  wouldhaveto  raiseto independence, and  to 
elevate  a  large  portion  of  our  fellow-citizens  who 
gain  a  hard,  scanty,  and  uncertain  subsistence  from 
the  earnings  of  daily  labor,  or  who ,  in  the  dependent 
relation  of  tenants,  pay  one  third  or  one  half  of  the 
proceeds  of  their  labor  to  the  owners  of  the  soil. 

I  cannot  forbear  to  quote,  in  favor  of  the  pas¬ 
sage  of  this  bill,  the  very  extract  which  the  gen¬ 
tleman  from  New  York  [Mr.  Jenkins]  has  quoted 
against  it: 

“Destitution  in  Philadelphia. — The  Philadelphia 
American  gives  an  account  of  a  visit  made  a  few  dai  s  ago 
to  the  hovels  of  many  of  the  poor  and  destitute  of  that  city, 
who  live  in  small  unventilated  rooms,  for  which  they  are 
compelled  to  pay  ten  cents  rent  each  day.  It  is  supposed 
the  number  of  these  unfortunate  beings  is  about  live  thou¬ 
sand.  Many  of  them  were  found  with  theirhands  and  feet 
frozen  for  want  of  fuel  to  keep  them  warm,  while  others 
had  even  disposed  of  most  of  their  scanty  clothing  to  buy 
bread.  In  one  cellar  a  family  were  found  who  had  been 
turned  out  of  home  because  they  were  unable  to  pay  their 
rent.  In  another  place,  a  poor  miserable  woman  and  sev¬ 
eral  children  were  found  in  a  shed,  the  children  covered  up 
in  a  heap  of  ashes  to  keep  them  warm.  Having  no  clothing 
whatever  to  cover  them,  the  mother  had  been  driven  to  this 
resort  to  keep  them  from  freezing.  The  clothes  had  been 
sold  to  buy  bread.” 

Now,  sir,  the  gentleman  is  most  unfortunate  in 
making  this  quotation.  If  he  had  labored  for 
months,  he  could  not  have  presented  a  more  forci¬ 
ble  argument  in  favor  of  the  bill.  Pass  this  bill, 
and  a  strong  inducement  will  be  presented  to  every 
one  who  is  destitute  of  the  means  of  support,  and 
who  has  industry,  to  fly  to  the  public  lands;  and 
instead  of  five  thousand  persons  in  unventilated 
rooms,  and  in  a  state  of  destitution,  in  the  city  of 
Philadelphia,  we  will,  in  a  few  years,  have  as 
many  independent  landholders  in  the  Western 
States  in  the  full  enjoyment  of  all  the  blessings  of 
life. 

Representatives  from  the  West  will  bear  me  out 


in  the  assertion  I  am  about  to  make.  There  are 
thousands  of  tenants  in  the  Western  country  with 
large  families,  who  are  unable  to  make  a  dollar 
over  and  above  the  amount  required  for  the  sup¬ 
port  of  themselves  and  families,  after  paying  to 
the  owners  of  the  soil  one  third  of  the  proceeds 
of  their  annual  labor.  How  much  ameliorated 
would  their  condition  be,  if  they  had  their  own 
soil  to  cultivate — homes  of  their  own,  and  the 
exclusive  enjoyment  of  the  hard  earnings  of  their 
daily  labor?  Secure  to  the  industrious  poor  man 
a  home  of  one  hundred  and  sixty  acres  of  rich 
and  productive  land,  and  you  attach  him  to  the 
country.  You  give  him  a  new  and  certain  in¬ 
terest  in  the  soil.  He  is  then  a  freeholder,  a  pro¬ 
prietor  of  his  own  broad  acres.  His  interest 
is  identified  with  the  Government  and  society. 
He  pays  taxes;  he  takes  an  interest  in  schools 
and  churches,  roads  and  bridges,  and  in  the 
voice  of  the  ballot-box.  He  feels  like  a  man, 
and  he  is  then,  in  the  full  sense  of  that  proud  ap¬ 
pellation,  an  American  citizen.  For  these,  and 
numerous  other  considerations,  I  hope  this  Con¬ 
gress  will  decide,  that  out  of  the  1,400,000,000 
unsold  acres  of  the  public  domain,  every  family, 
every  poor  and  homeless  American  citizen,  may 
find  a  home — a  home,  sir,  which  he  can  call  his 
own — his  castle  of  strength,  where,  secure  be¬ 
neath  his  humble  roof  and  around  his  own  fire¬ 
side,  “  he  can  worship  God  beneath  his  own  vine 
and  fig  tree,  none  daring  to  molest  or  make  him 
afraid.” 

GRANTS  OF  LANDS  TO  ILLINOIS. 

Much  has  been  said  in  the  progress  of  this  debate 
aboutthe  grants  to  Illinois,  While  the  twelve  land 
States  are  denounced  by  the  gentleman  from  New 
Y ork  as  playing  a  ‘  ‘  grab  game  in  the  struggle  to  see 
which  could  get  the  largest  share,”  and  are  de¬ 
nounced  as  land  stealers,  Illinois  unfortunately  is 
looked  upon  as,  par  excellence,  the  biggest  land  thief 
of  all.  Her  good  fortune  in  securing  liberal  grants, 
has  caused  her  to  be  regarded  with  a  sort  of  mali¬ 
ciousness,  which  she  in  nowise  merits,  and  which 
are  by  no  means  justified  by  the  facts  of  the  case. 
What  was  the  principle  upon  which  Congress  ap¬ 
propriated  alternate  sections  of  the  public  lands  to 
aid  her  in  the  construction  of  her  Illinois  and 
Michigan  Canal  and  the  Central  Railroad?  Did 
the  United  States  make  them  without  an  equiva¬ 
lent?  Did  Illinois  claim  them  as  a  charity,  or  for 
her  exclusive  benefit?  No,  sir;  very  far  from  it. 
The  grants  were  made  upon  higher  considerations 
than  mere  benefit  to  Illinois — considerations  of  the 
general  welfare  and  national  prosperity.  The  State 
occupied  the  relation  of  trustee  or  agent  to  the 
General  Government  to  appropriate  the  lands  to  the 
construction  of  works  of  acknowledged  national 
importance,  and  in  such  a  way  as  to  present  induce¬ 
ments  for  the  sale  and  occupancy  of  her  other 
wild  lands  which  had  never  before  existed.  These 
works  were  essential  links  in  a  great  national 
highway  extending  from  the  ocean  to  the  gulf, 
and  affecting  in  a  high  degree  the  interests  of  one 
half  the  States  of  the  Americen  Union.  Take  the 
map  of  the  United  States  and  look  at  it.  From 
Portland,  in  Maine,  from  New  York  and  all  the 
Eastern  cities,  by  various  routes  to  Lake  Erie, 
across  that  lake  to  Detroit,  thence  to  New  Buffalo, 
thence  across  Lake  Michigan  to  Chicago,  thence 
by  the  canal  and  Illinois  river,  or  Central  Railroad, 
to  Cairo,  and  through  the  States  of  Kentucky, 


7 


Tennessee,  Mississippi,  and  Alabama  to  Mobile, 
a  distance  of  one  thousand  eight  hundred  miles ! 
Why,  sir,  the  world  in  all  its  past  history  has  not 
seen  such  a  route.  Here,  sir,  is  the  greatest  high¬ 
way  of  ancient  or  modern  times.  The  Roman 
ways  were  the  pride  of  the  people  in  the  days  of 
Roman  power;  but  they  dwindle  into  insignifi¬ 
cance  compared  with  this  mighty  track  of  the  iron 
horse.  It  was  not  for  Illinois  alone,  but  for  the 
nation  that  these  grants  were  made  The  State  of 
Illinois  was  the  mere  crossing-place  for  the  States 
of  the  Union. 

But  what  has  the  Government  lost  by  her  grants 
of  land  to  Illinois?  The  lands  along  the  line  of 
the  Central  Railroad  had  been  in  market  exposed 
to  sale  at  the  land  offices  for  twenty -five  years, 
and  on  account  of  their  remoteness  from  market 
and  destitution  of  timber  were  likely  to  remain 
unsold  for  half  a  century  more.  They  came  under 
the  denomination  of  refuse  lands,  and  belonged  to 
that  class  which  at  a  former  session  of  Congress 
were  proposed  to  be  ceded  to  the  States  in  which 
they  were  situated,  to  enable  the  Government  to 
dispense  with  the  expensive  machinery  of  land 
offices  and  other  expenses,  which  cost  the  Gov¬ 
ernment  more  than  the  revenue  derived  from  their 
sale.  Sir,  it  would  not  take  long  to  convince  any 
gentleman  on  this  floor,  who  would  go  along  the 
route  of  the  Central  Railroad,  that  the  Govern¬ 
ment,  as  a  great  landholder,  had  adopted  the  most 
effectual  means  of  imparting  value  to  her  lands 
and  bringing  them  into  market,  and  that,  while 
doing  this  directly,  she  had  indirectly  given  an 
impulse  to  trade,  a  stimulus  to  production,  and 
opened  new  fields  to  enterprise,  affecting  in  no 
small  degree  a  large  portion  of  the  Union.  It 
is  a  fact,  that  a  large  number  of  the  citizens  of 
southern  Illinois  have  for  many  years  occupied 
and  improved  portions  of  the  public  lands,  with¬ 
out  procuring  any  title  from  the  Government,  and 
without  the  fear  of  having  their  possessions  dis¬ 
turbed.  These  lands  being  in  sparsely-settled  sec¬ 
tions,  and  inaccessibly  situated,  were  a  hard  bar¬ 
gain  even  to  the  settler,  and  failed  to  excite  the 
cupidity  of  the  speculator.  But  now  that  this 
road  has  been  projected ,  they  are  becoming  anxious 
about  their  titles,  are  asserting  their  preemptions, 
and  thousands  are  anxiously  waiting,  with  their 
hard  dollars,  or  warrants  laid  by,  to  take  up  the 
reserved  lands  within  the  thirty-mile  strip  re¬ 
served  from  sale  the  moment  they  are  brought  into 
market.  And  yet  not  a  spade  of  earth  has  been 
removed  on  the  road;  but  these  lands  will  now,  in 
bare  expectancy  of  its  completion,  readily  yield 
the  $2  50  per  acre,  and  thus  realize  to  the  Govern¬ 
ment  every  dollar  she  asked  for  the  whole  at  a 
period  much  earlier  than  she  could  have  realized 
the  same  without  the  grant.  If  the  gentleman 
from  Maine  [Mr.  Fuller]  is  right,  they  are,  or 
soon  will  be,  worth  $10  per  acre.  What,  then, 
has  the  Government  lost  ? 

THE  ILLINOIS  AND  MICHIGAN  CANAL. 

The  gentleman  from  New  York  [Mr.  Jenkins] 
has  asserted,  (1  know  not  upon  what  authority,) 
that  the  grant  of  alternate  sections  of  lands  to  the 
State  of  Illinois,  to  aid  in  the  construction  of  her 
canal,  has  resulted  in  great  injury  to  that  State. 
It  is  easy  to  show  that  the  construction  of  this 
great  work  has  had  an  immense  effect  in  promo¬ 
ting  the  settlement  of  the  public  lands  and  the  | 


prosperity  of  the  State  of  Illinois.  To  show  its 
influence  upon  the  commerce  and  prosperity  of 
northern  Illinois,  it  is  onty  necessary  to  call  the 
attention  of  the  committee  to  some  of  the  statis¬ 
tics  of  the  commerce  and  growth  of  the  city  of 
Chicago,  situated  at  its  terminus  on  Lake  Michi¬ 
gan.  In  the  year  1847,  before  the  completion  of 
the  canal,  the  imports  and  exports  of  the  city  were 
only  $4,500,000;  while  in  the  year  1848,  the  first 
year  after  its  completion,  they  amounted  to 
$20,000,000.  The  shipments  of  corn  from  the 
port  of  Chicago  in  the  year  1847,  were  67,305 
bushels;  in  1848,  550,460  bushels;  and  in  1851, 
3,221,137  bushels;  and  of  this  amount,  2,235,362 
bushels  were  received  into  Chicago  by  way  of  the 
canal.  The  lumber  trade  of  the  city  doubled  in  a 
single  year  after  the  completion  of  the  canal.  So 
immense  is  this  trade,  that  considerably  over 
100,000  tons  of  lumber  are  annually  transported 
on  the  canal,  and  down  the  Illinois  river  into  the 
interior  of  the  State — the  evidences  of  which,  as 
remarked  by  the  Chicago  Tribune,  may  be  seen 
in  the  transformation  of  the  rude  log-cabin  to  the 
elegant  mansion,  and  in  the  erection  of  commo¬ 
dious  church  edifices  and  comfortable  school- 
houses,  and  in  a  great  variety  of  valuable  and 
extensive  improvements. 

General  Cass  said  in  the  Senate  Chamber  in 
1848,  “  It  is  now  twenty-five  years  ago  that  I  sat 
‘  all  night  in  a  canoe  at  the  head  of  a  pond  at 
‘  Chicago,  there  being  no  human  habitation  in 
‘  which  we  could  obtain  shelter  from  the  mouth  of 
‘  the  Illinois  to  the  mouth  of  the  Chicago  river.” 
And  yet,  sir,  Chicago  is  now  an  important  city — 
the  second  city  of  the  lakes.  Look  at  its  wonder¬ 
ful  growth.  Its  population  in  the  year  1840  was 
4,479;  in  1848,  20,023;  and  now,  in  1852,  it  is 
40,000.  And  hence,  sir,  her  destiny  is  onward 
to  her  proud  elevation  as  empress  of  the  lakes, 
the  great- commercial  emporium  into  whose  com¬ 
mission  houses  shall  pour  one  third  of  the  com¬ 
merce  of  the  Union — a  mighty  city,  rivaling  an¬ 
cient  Carthage  in  her  pride  of  power.  And  since 
the  period  referred  to  by  General  Cass,  the  coun¬ 
try  stretching  from  the  mouth  of  the  Chicago  to 
the  mouth  of  the  Illinois  river — a  distance  of  four 
hundred  miles — has  made  rapid  advancement,  and 
has  now  a  better  foundation  for  solid  and  durable 
prosperity  than  any  portion  of  the  American 
Union  of  equal  extent. 

In  the  year  1831, 1  first  ascended  the  Illinois 
river.  The  whole  commerce  of  the  river  was 
then  carried  on  by  some  four  or  five  old  steam¬ 
boats,  which  being  unsafe  for  the  dangerous  navi¬ 
gation  of  the  Mississippi  river,  were  transferred 
to  this  river,  whose  current  is  gentle,  and  in  good 
stages  of  water  perhaps  the  best  navigable  stream 
in  the  world.  But  now,  sir,  from  fifteen  to 
twenty-five  medium-sized  steamers  ply  weekly 
between  St.  Louis  and  Lasalle,  the  western  termi¬ 
nus  of  the  canal,  a  distance  of  three  hundred  and 
twenty  miles,  laden  with  ponderous  cargoes  of 
merchandise,  produce,  and  lumber,  and  thronged 
with  thousands  of  travelers  in  pursuit  of  business 
I  or  pleasure  on  their  routes  South,  by  way  of  the 
Mississippi,  or  to  the  new  States  and  Territories 
of  the  Northwest  by  way  of  Galena,  or  by  way 
of  the  Northern  lakes  and  railway  routes  to  the 
Eastern  cities. 

ILLINOIS  RIVER. 

It  will  surprise  many  to  learn,  that  since  the  con- 


8 


struction  of  the  canal,  the  transportation  and  travel  | 
on  the  Illinois  river  is  greater  than  that  on  either  ! 
the  upper  Mississippi  or  Missouri  rivers.  In  the 
year  1851,  there  was  imported  into  the  city  of  St. 
Louis  from  the  Illinois  river  385,267  bushels  more 
of  wheat  than  from  the  Missouri  river,  and  215,277 
bushels  more  than  from  the  upper  Mississippi. 
The  difference  in  the  article  of  corn  is  still  greater. 
In  the  year  1850,  there  were  seven  hundred  and 
eighty-eight  arrivals  of  steamboats  at  the  city  of 
St.  Louis  from  the  Illinois  river,  and  in  1851,  six 
hundred  and  thirty-four;  and  in  the  two  years,  the 
arrivals  from  the  Illinois  river  were  one  hundred 
and  forty-eight  more  than  from  the  Missouri, 
seven  hundred  and  thirty-one  more  than  from  the 
upper  Mississippi,  four  hundred  and  seventy-two 
more  than  from  the  Ohio,  and  six  hundred  and 
ninety-two  more  than  from  New  Orleans.  And, 
moreover,  one  half  of  the  tonnage  on  the  Illinois 
river  finds  its  outlet  north  by  way  of  Chicago, 
instead  of  south  by  way  of  St.  Louis.  Of  the 
three  million  bushels  of  corn  transported  on  the 
river,  two  millions  seek  its  Eastern  market  by  way 
of  the  canal  and  the  lakes.  An  estimate  furnished 
me  by  Captain  A.  B.  Dewit,  one  of  the  oldest  and 
most  experienced  navigators  of  that  stream,  shows 
that  about  1,160,000  tons  of  produce,  820,000  tons 
of  merchandise,  and  three  hundred  tons  of  lum¬ 
ber  and  salt  are  annually  transported  on  this  river 
by  means  of  steamboats  and  canal  boats. 

While  on  this  subject,  it  may  be  proper  for  me 
to  remark,  that  from  three  to  five  months  in  the 
year  the  navigation  of  this  river  is  obstructed  by 
bars  and  flats,  producinggreat  delay,  expense,  and 
losses,  preventing  access  to  market,  and  affecting 
vast  and  important  interests  connected  with  the 
commerce  of  the  river.  There  are  twenty-eight 
bars  or  flats  between  Lasalle.and  the  mouth  of  the 
river,  composed,  some  of  thenQ  of  sand,  and 
others  of  mud,  which  could  be  easily  .removed  by 
dredging,  at  an  expense  most jnconsidera^le  when 
compared  with  expenses  irf<Jurj>fl  for  removing 
obstructions  in  harbors  for  the  benefit  of  foreign 
commerce;  and  when  we  consider  that  this  stream 
is  a  very  important  link  in  the  chain  of  national 
intercommunication  which  extends  from  the  At¬ 
lantic  to  New  Orleans  and  Mobile,  on  the  Gulf  of 
Mexico,  it  is  of  the  highest  national  importance 
that  these  obstructions  should  be  removed.  Con¬ 
gress,  by  special  enactment,  once  declared  this  j 
stream  a  national  highway;  and  it  is  as  much  en¬ 
titled  to  the  claim  of  nationality  as  the  Mississippi 
itself;  for  it  is,  for  the  purposes  of  commerce,  a 
direct  extension  of  that  very  river,  to  meet  the 
mighty  northern  thoroughfare  extending  by  rail¬ 
way  and  the  lakes,  to  the  Atlantic  ocean. 

But,  sir,  the  traveler  along  the  canal  not  only 
sees  a  new  and  flourishing  commerce,  but  he  sees 
another  object  dearer  to  the  patriot’s  heart.  He 
sees  every  canal  boat  and  steamer  thronged  with 
travelers,  citizens  from  every  portion  of  our  com¬ 
mon  country.  Here  he  finds  the  Western  man, 
the  Southern  man,  and,  of  course,  “  Brother  Jona¬ 
than,”  expressing  their  astonishment  at  the  magic 
and  wonderful  growth  of  that  Western  world  of 
ours,  discussing  stocks,  finance,  railroads,  trade, 
agriculture,  corn,  cotton,  and  codfish;  the  compro¬ 
mise,  secession,  slavery,  and,  what  is  better,  learn¬ 
ing  from  each  other  that  there  is  no  good  reason 
for  the  local  animosities  which  have  heretofore  n 
existed  and  exhibited  themselves  in  alarming  as-  j| 


I  pects,  threatening  to  jar  the  pillars  of  the  Union 
and  which,  happily,  the  contact  and  collisions  of 
modern  commerce  and  business  in tecourrse  are  fast 
wearing  away. 

Mr.  Chairman,  I  feel  like  complimenting  the 
honorable  gentleman  from  South  Carolina  [Mr. 
Orr]  for  his  lucid  and  eloquent  speech  in  behalf  of 
the  Missouri  roads;  and  it  is  not  for  his  eloquence 
alone  I  thank  him,  but  for  his  magnanimity.  That 
gentleman  well  knew  that  these  roads  did  not  point 
to  the  South,  but  to  the  East;  and  that,  while  the 
South  would  enjoy  no  direct  benefit  from  their 
construction,  they  would  pour  the  rich  treasures  of 
a  new  and  valuable  commerce  into  the  commission 
i  houses  of  the  Eastern  cities.  Yet,  sir,  he  did  not 
pursue  the  illiberal  policy  of  opposing  grants  for 
these  roads,  because  calculated  to  benefit  the  East 
more  directly  than  the  South.  I  will  say  to  that 
honorable  gentleman,  I  trust  the  day  is  not  far 
distant  when,  by  means  of  the  Illinois  and  Ala¬ 
bama  road,  we  can  supply  the  South  with  the  pro¬ 
ductions  of  our  Western  farms,  and  receive  in  ex¬ 
change  the  rice,  cotton,  and  sugar  of  the  South; 
when  the  citizen  of  the  South,  flying  from  the  heat 
of  a  Southern  sun,  shall  find  a  pleasant  summer’s 
retreat  in  our  beautiful  groves  and  prairies  of  the 
West;  and  I  tell  that  gentleman,  if  the  halcyon 
day  predicted  by  my  friend  from  Missouri  [Mr. 
Miller]  shall  ever  come,  when  the  young  men  of 
the  South  shall  intermarry  with  our  beautiful  daugh¬ 
ters  of  the  prairie,  it  will  not  be  long  till  all  their 
notions  of  secession  and  disunion  will  be  blown 
sky  high.  A  union  of  the  descendants  of  Sumter 
and  Marion  with  those  of  Boone  and  the  Western 
pioneer,  would  be  a  union  indeed,  and,  I  think, 
would  be  “  preserved  for  the  sake  of  the  Union.” 

GRANTS  FOR  RAILROADS. 

Mr.  Chairman,  I  do  insist  we  have  a  right  to 
complain  of  the  old  States,  because  they  refuse  to 
help  us  when  they  can  do  so  without  injuring  them¬ 
selves.  We  propose  to  give  them  all  they  ask  for 
the  lands.  If  we  build  the  roads,  the  Govern¬ 
ment  gets  $2  50  per  acre  for  the  reserved  alternate 
sections,  which  is  all  it  asks  for  the  whole.  If 
we  do  not  build  the  roads,  we  get  none  of  the 
lands — they  revert  to  the  Government. 

The  argument  is,  that  the  lands  belong  to  all 
the  States — that  they  are  a  common  fund.  I  admit 
it.  We  do  not  propose  to  diminish  the  common 
fund.  Then  is  it  not  illiberal  in  the  Represent¬ 
atives  of  the  old  States  to  withhold  from  us  a  pos¬ 
itive  benefit  when  they  lose  nothing?  The  public 
lands,  you  say,  are  common  property.  Let  us 
see  what  there  is  in  this  argument.  Suppose  that 
a  custom-house  was  needed  in  New  York,  or  that 
some  obstruction  in  the  harbor  of  that  city  required 
to  be  removed,  and  the  gentleman  from  New  York 
should  bring  forward  a  bill  appropriating  money 
out  of  the  Treasury,  and  I  should  say  to  him,  “  Sir, 
you  must  not  take  the  money  in  the  Treasury;  it 
is  common  property,  and  belongs  to  the  people  of 
all  the  States,  and  you  must  not  appropriate  it  to 
these  objects,  unless  in  the  same  act  of  appropri¬ 
ation  you  give  to  the  State  of  Illinois  an  equal 
amount  for  some  object  she  may  have  in  view.” 
Why,  if  we  can  make  no  appropriations  unless 
they  confer  equal  benefit  on  all  the  States,  then 
we  can  make  none  at  all.  The  argument  that, 

1  being  common  property,  the  public  lands  cannot, 

|  therefore,  be  appropriated  to  great  objects  of  pub- 


9 


lie  utility,  because  they  happen  to  lie  in  a  partic¬ 
ular  section,  is  an  argument  which,  in  the  present 
case,  may  pander  to  the  cupidity  of  the  Repre¬ 
sentatives  of  the  old  States,  and  to  their  jealousy 
of  the  West;  but  it  is  not  very  creditable  to  the 
schools  and  colleges  in  which  they  were  taught 
the  principles  of  logic. 

There  are  paramount  reasons  why  the  Govern¬ 
ment  should  make  these  grants.  First,  as  a  great 
landholder;  the  Government,  in  the  management 
of  its  property,  ought  to  exercise,  as  far  as  is 
practicable,  thesameprudence  and  foresight  which 
an  individual  under  similar  circumstances  would. 
An  individual  owning  large  tracts  of  forest  or  prai¬ 
rie  land,  remote  from  settlement  and  market,  and 
valueless,  would  readily  sell,  or  even  give  away, 
a  portion  of  said  lands,  to  increase  the  value  of 
the  residue;  and  especially,  if  by  so  doing  he 
could  make  that  residue  yield  in  a  short  time  more 
than  the  whole  would  in  its  unimproved  condi¬ 
tion. 

Second,  as  a  measure  of  economy,  to  hasten  the 
sales  of  the  public  lands,  and  thus  at  the  earliest 
period  enable  the  Government  to  dispense  with 
the  expensive  machinery  of  land  offices  and  other 
disbursements  incurred  in  the  sale  of  said  lands. 

The  sale  of  the  public  lands  cannot  be  more  ef¬ 
fectually  promoted  than  by  opening  roads  through 
them.  Take  the  route  from  Burlington  to  Lafay¬ 
ette,  or  from  Springfield  to  Terre  Haute,  portions 
of  which  run  through  large  bodies  of  the  public 
lands — prairies  extensive  and  untenanted,  and  dis¬ 
tant  from  market — lands  not.  worth  Government 
price.  Suppose  that  by  an  Almighty  fiat,  a  river 
straight  as  an  arrow,  unobstructed  by  snags  or 
bars,  and  navigable  for  steamers  of  the  largest 
class  at  all  seasons  of  the  year,  should  be  run 
through  those  beautiful  and  productive  lands: 
how  long  would  it  be  before  the  Government 
would  sell  every  acre  within  a  day’s  travel  of  that 
stream?  How  long  before  commerce  would  flap 
her  thousand  sails  upon  that  river  ?  How  long 
before  its  shores  would  resound  with  the  roar  of 
steam  and  the  rattle  of  machinery?  How  long 
before  its  banks  would  teem  with  smiling  villages, 
and  its  broad  acres  bend  beneath  fields  of  waving 
green,  and  the  ripened  harvest?  Well,  sir,  the 
railroad  will  produce  the  same  results;  yea,  for  all 
the  purposes  of  commerce,  speed,  and  safety,  the 
railroad  surpasses  the  river. 

CLAIMS  OF  THE  WEST. 

The  gentleman  from  New  York  [Mr.  Bennett] 
in  his  speech  says: 

“  In  truth,  it  is  a  kind  of  a  grab  game,  where  each  of  the 
new  States  gets  all  it  can — the  most  selfish  and  clamorous 
taking  the  largest  share — while  more  than  half  of  the  States, 
and  two  thirds  of  the  population,  are  mere  spectators  to  the 
skill  and  rapacity  which  the  twelve  land  States  display  in 
taking  the  public  lands.” 

Rapacity  ! — This  is  a  term  applied  to  barbarians 
and  robbers.  Sir,  this  comes  well  from  the  modest 
State  of  New  York.  If  there  is  anything  that  ever 
will  keep  that  State  in  the  back  ground,  it  is  her 
wonderful  modesty.  She  never  asks  for  anything. 
She  never  gets  anything.  She  is  languishing  to 
death  for  want  of  some  appropriations  out  of  the 
Federal  Treasury.  Now,  sir,  to  be  serious,  I  do 
not  complain  of  New  York.  I  do  not  complain  of 
what  she  has  got.  As  a  citizen  of  this  nation,  I 
am  proud  of  the  Empire  State.  I  glory  in  her  pros¬ 
perity,  in  the  Napoleon-like  energies  of  her  peo¬ 


ple,  and  in  that  daring  enterprise  of  her  merchants 
and  tradesmen  which  has  sent  our  flag  into  every 
port,  and  planted  the  feet  of  our  sailors  on  every 
island  of  the  sea;  and  I  hope,  sir,  that  the  liberal 
hand  of  the  Government  will  ever  be  extended  to 
her  in  promoting  our  commerce  with  foreign  na¬ 
tions;  but,  sir,  as  a  Western  man,  I  hurl  back 
the  charge  of  rapacity  made  against  us  for  asking 
grants  of  worthless  wild  lands  to  enable  us  to  get 
to  her  markets,  and  to  swell  the  sails  of  her  com¬ 
merce. 

Mr.  Chairman,  much  consideration  is  due  to 
the  new  States.  The  old  States  came  into  the 
Union  proprietors  of  all  the  public  lands  within 
their  limits.  Upon  the  separation  of  the  Colonies 
from  the  mother  country,  they  succeeded  to  the 
right  of  eminent  domain,  which,  up  to  that  time, 
had  existed  in  the  Crown.  They  have  received 
the  proceeds  of  these  lands  into  their  State  treas¬ 
uries,  and  they  have  been  disbursed  for  the  benefit 
of  their  citizens.  But  not  so  with  the  new  States. 
In  most  of  them  the  General  Government  is,  to 
this  day,  the  proprietor  of  the  larger  portion  of 
the  lands  within  their  limits.  These  States,  be¬ 
fore  their  admission  into  the  Union,  were  required 
to  subscribe  to  the  conditions  contained  in  the  or¬ 
dinance  of  1787 — “never  to  interfere  with  the 
primary  disposal  of  the  soil;”  and  “  to  impose  no 
tax  on  land  the  property  of  the  United  States;” 
and  in  the  acts  of  their  admission  into  the  Union 
as  States,  they  were  required  to  subscribe  to  an¬ 
other  condition — “  that  every  tract  of  land  sold  by 
‘  the  United  States,  after  the  day  of  their  admis¬ 
sion,  should  remain  exempt  from  any  tax  for 
‘  State,  county,  township,  or  any  purpose  what- 
‘  ever,  for  the  term  of  five  years  from  and  after  the 
‘  day  of  sale.”  The  first  condition  is  still  in 
force,  and  the  latter  remained  in  force  until  Jan¬ 
uary,  1847,  when  Congress  passed  an  act  author¬ 
izing  the  States  admitted  into  the  Union  prior  to 
the  24th  day  of  April,  1820,  to  tax  the  lands  from 
the  day  of  sale.  It  is  true,  the  United  States  gave 
the  sixteenth  section;  a  township  for  a  seminary 
of  learning;  the  saline  lands,  and  two  fifths  of  the 
five  per  cent,  of  the  proceeds  of  the  public  lands 
to  the  State  of  Illinois  in  exchange  for  this  immu¬ 
nity  from  taxation.  But  it  is  very  easy  to  show 
that  the  State  has  lost  several  millions  of  dol¬ 
lars  more  by  this  surrender  of  her  sovereign  right 
to  tax  the  lands  than  all  she  has  obtained  from 
the  concessions  of  the  Government  in  considera¬ 
tion  for  this  immunity. 

But,  again:  there  is  an  equitable  claim  which 
entitles  the  new  States  to  some  consideration.  The 
citizens  of  the  new  States  have  reclaimed  the  pub¬ 
lic  lands  from  the  wilderness,  and  given  them  all 
the  value  they  possess.  The  actual  settler,  by  his 
labor  and  cultivation  of  the  one  hundred  and  sixty 
acres  he  buys  from  the  Government,  gives  value 
to  and  brings  into  market  the  adjacent  lands. 
Every  furrow  made  by  his  plow,  every  road  he 
opens,  every  bridge  he  builds,  and  every  house 
he  erects,  adds  value  to  the  adjacent  Government 
lands;  and  in  Illinois,  and  in  most  of  the  new 
States,  the  system  of  taxation  being  on  the  ad  va¬ 
lorem  principle,  the  more  he  improves  his  lands 
the  higher  are  his  taxes;  but  the  General  Govern¬ 
ment  being  the  largest  proprietor,  derives  the  full 
benefit  of  these  accessions  of  value,  but  pays  no 
taxes. 

The  reclamation  of  that  vast  territory  west  of 


10 


the  Alleghenies  from  the  savage  and  the  solitude 
of  the  wilderness,  is  a  high  compliment  to  the  ad¬ 
venturous  spirit  of  the  pioneer,  whose  dauntless 
courage  has  impelled  him  to  encounter  all  the 
vicissitudes  of  a  frontier  life,  and  to  lay  broad  and 
deep  the  foundation  of  great  commonwealths  in 
these  wild  forests  and  untenanted  prairies.  The 
settlement  of  the  West  is  the  grandest  achieve¬ 
ment  of  the  age.  An  half  century  discloses  a 
magnificent  empire,  and  the  establishment  of  the 
institutions  of  law,  religion,  and  liberty  on  that 
territory  which,  at  the  beginning  of  the  Govern¬ 
ment,  had  been  consigned  by  prophecy  as  the  per¬ 
petual  domain  of  the  savage. 

And  what  has  the  Government  done  ?  It  is  true, 
she  has  negotiated  treaties  with  the  Indians,  but 
by  her  Indian  policy  she  has  hedged  up  the  path  of 
the  pioneer  from  the  frontiers  of  Virginia  at  each 
successive  advance  to  the  Rocky  mountains  by 
walls  of  wild  Indians,  who  stand  ready  on  the 
border-line  with  the  implements  of  death  to  mas¬ 
sacre  him,  his  wife,  and  children.  By  her  land 
policy  she  has  wrung  from  the  hard  earnings  of 
the  pioneer  $1  25  per  acre  for  redeeming  her  terri¬ 
tory  from  savage  occupation,  and  making  farms 
for  her  in  the  wilderness — that  $1  25  to  be  drawn 
into  the  abyss  of  the  Treasury,  to  be  expended 
anywhere  else  than  in  the  region  of  its  acquisition. 
The  poor  immigrant — the  actual  settler  has  fol¬ 
lowed,  with  his  axe  in  one  hand  and  his  gun  in 
the  other,  close  on  to  the  receding  council-fire  of 
the  Indian,  leaving  behind  him  all  the  conveni¬ 
ences  of  society — destitute  of  schools  and  churches 
— dwelling  in  rude  log  cabins,  and  exposed  to 
every  conceivable  danger  and  privation.  He  has 
made  your  lands  valuable,  and  paid  you  $1  25 
per  acre  for  them,  which,  instead  of  finding  its 
way  into  the  State  Treasury  to  be  disbursed 
among  these  settlers,  has  gone  into  the  United 
States  Treasury,  to  be  expended  for  the  benefit  of 
foreign  commerce.  All  your  boasted  liberality — 
all  your  “  I  would  be  generous  to  the  new  States,” 
amounts  to  this,  that  out  of  your  thousands  of 
millions  of  acres  of  public  lands,  you  have  granted 
to  the  land  States,  for  the  purposes  of  internal  im¬ 
provements,  only  11,500,395  acres. 

RIVERS  AND  HARBORS. 

Sir,  the  rivers  and  harbors  of  the  West  must 
remain  unimproved;  her  three  hundred  millions  of 
commerce  and  her  ten  millions  of  people  must 
have  no  protection;  the  lives  and  property  of  her 
citizens  must  be  sacrificed  for  the  want  of  small 
appropriations  to  remove  the  snags  and  bars  from 
her  rivers;  her  vast  stores  of  agricultural  produc¬ 
tions  must  rot  in  her  barns  for  the  want  of  small 
portions  of  the  public  domain  in  aiding  her  to  get 
them  to  market;  and  this,  too,  when  it  is  incon¬ 
testably  proven  that  the  Government  receives  more 
immediate  benefits  from  the  grants  than  the  States 
themselves. 

From  statistics  taken  by  direction  of  the  Treas¬ 
ury  Department,  it  appears  that,  in  the  year  1851, 
67  vessels  were  lost  on  the  inland  lakes  and  rivers, 
35  by  tempest,  and  32  by  snags;  628  lives  were 
lost  during  that  year,  and  the  total  value  of  prop¬ 
erty  destroyed  was  near  two  millions  of  dollars. 
I  noticed,  the  other  day,  a  letter  of  a  St.  Louis 
insurance  company  to  pilots  on  the  Mississippi 
river,  directing  them  to  avoid  a  certain  snag  in  the 
channel  of  that  stream,  and  stating  that  three  fine 


steamers  had  been  sunk  by  striking  that  same 
snag,  at  a  sacrifice  of  $40,000.  Now,  if  there  was 
any  obstruction  in  any  harbor  on  the  sea-board, 
how  long  would  it  be  before  Congress  would  make 
an  appropriation  for  its  removal,  and  who  would 
vote  for  it  more  cheerfully  than  Representatives 
from  the  West?  On  my  way  to  this  city,  down 
the  Illinois  and  Mississippi,  and  up  the  Ohio 
rivers,  I  saw  scores  of  boats  stationed  on  sand¬ 
bars,  making  ineffectual  efforts  to  proceed  on  their 
journeys.  The  boat  on  which  I  was  a  passenger, 
was  detained  twenty-four  hours  at  the  mouth  of 
the  Cumberland  river.  Who,  sir,  is  responsible 
for  these  obstructions  to  commerce,  expensive  de¬ 
lays,  and  immense  sacrifices  of  life  and  property? 
Let  the  party  whose  policy  it  has  been  to  vote 
down  and  veto  every  river  and  harbor  bill,  answer? 
Why,  sir,  while  we  have  been  discussing  the  rel¬ 
ative  claims  of  “Young  Fogy’*' [Mr.  Douglas] 
and  “  Old  Fogy,”  [General  Cass,]  we  could  have 
passed  a  x-iver  and  harbor  bill,  which  would  have 
sent  a  gladsome  thrill  of  joy  throughout  the  mighty 
Valley  of  the  Mississippi.  A  small  appropria¬ 
tion — no  burden  on  the  Treasury — an  amount  we 
would  never  miss,  would  clear  out  the  snags  and 
deepen  the  channels  of  our  Western  rivers;  would 
rouse  the  young  West,  stimulate  her  enterprise, 
and  advance  her  prosperity ! 

There  can  be  no  question  as  to  the  obligation 
which  rests  upon  Congress  to  make  these  appro¬ 
priations.  The  same  clause  of  the  Constitution 
which  confers  upon  her  the  power  to  protect  life 
and  property  upon  the  ocean,  confers  power  to 
protect  life  and  property  upon  the  lakes  and  rivers. 
Congress  voluntarily  assumed  this  obligation  in 
the  passage  of  the  ordinance  of  1787,  which  says: 

“  The  navigable  waters  leading  into  the  Mississippi  and 
St.  Lawrence,  and  the  carrying  places  between  them,  shall 
be  common  highways,  and  forever  free  to  all  of  the  citizens 
of  the  United  States,  without  any  tax,  impost,  or  duty 
therefor.” 

Congress  having  thus  declared  these  rivers  to  be 
common  highways  for  all  the  States,  and  deprived 
the  States  of  any  power  to  improve  the  same 
by  impost,  tonnage  duties,  or  other  tax,  she  has 
taken  upon  herself  the  irrevocable  obligation  to  im¬ 
prove  them,  and  make  them  in  truth  “ common 
highways ”  for  the  citizens  of  all  the  States.  There 
is  no  power  in  the  States  to  make  these  improve¬ 
ments.  If  it  is  replied  that  the  States  can  do  it 
with  the  consent  of  Congress,  then  I  rejoin  that  to 
do  it  with  consent  is  not  power,  it  is  permission. 
And  what  State  will  undertake  the  enterprise? 
“What  is  everybody’s  business  is  nobody’s.” 
What  States  will  undertake,  out  of  the  moneys  in 
their  treasuries,  to  make  improvements  in  which 
all  the  States  have  a  common  interest,  and  ought  to 
contribute  their  common  share? 

Is  this  Government  not  partial  in  its  appropri¬ 
ations?  The  golden  regions  of  California  are 
scarcely  in  the  Union,  before  millions  are  drawn 
from  the  Treasury  to  connect  New  York  and  San 
Francisco  by  ocean  steamers.  The  Eastern  emi¬ 
grant,  after  a  speedy  journey  in  a  floating  palace, 
finds  himself  safely  harbored  in  the  bay  of  San 
Francisco,  while  the  Western  emigrant,  in  his  ox 
wagon,  must  pursue  his  weary  and  perilous  pil¬ 
grimage  across  mountains  and  wild  deserts,  and 
fight  his  way  through  hordes  of  savages,  who  infest 
his  path  at  every  step  of  his  advance.  For  one 
third  of  the  money  expended  for  steamers,  the 


11 


Government  could  open  a  national  road  between 
the  frontiers  of  Missouri  and  San  Francisco,  es¬ 
tablish  the  necessary  military  posts,  and  station 
companies  of  soldiers  within  convenient  distances 
all  along  the  route.  But  the  cries  of  distress 
along  that  route,  and  the  murders  and  depredations 
committed,  are  far  below  the  notice  of  Congress. 

THE  WEST — EXTENT  AND  RESOURCES. 

It  is  time  our  brethren  of  the  East  had  informed 
themselves  of  the  extent  and  resources  of  the  West. 
If  they  had,  they  would  not  look  upon  her  States 
either  “  as  spoiled  children  asking  for  what  they 
were  not  entitled,”  or  as  Goths  and  Vandals, 
“  seeking  every  opportunity  to  pillage  the  Treas¬ 
ury.”  To  judge  from  the  legislation  of  Congress, 
one  would  infer  that  they  look  upon  the  mighty 
Mississippi  and  all  its  tributaries  as  not  entitled 
to  as  much  consideration  as  the  most  inconsider¬ 
able  harbor  on  the  sea-board.  If  they  would  in¬ 
form  themselves,  they  would  find,  as  the  gentleman 
from  Ohio  [Mr.  Campbell]  says,  that  “  we  had 
some  country,  and  some  people  there.”  Take  your 
stand  at  the  mouth  of  the  Missouri,  and  look  up 
to  its  source,  3,217  miles,  up  the  Illinois  400  miles, 
the  Ohio  1,000  miles,  and  the  mighty  Mississippi, 
the  great  trunk  of  all,  as  she  sweeps  her  turbid 
waters  3,500  miles,  from  her  headland  home  in  the 
wilderness  to  the  Gulf — traverse  the  valleys  of  the 
Wabash,  the  Kaskaskia,  the  Rock,  the  Iowa,  the 
Des  Moines,  the  Wisconsin,  the  St.  Peters,  and  you 
will  find  there  is  some  territory  there.  An  accu¬ 
rate  historian  of  the  West,  the  Rev.  Mr.  Peck, 
informs  us  that,  “  The  Mississippi  and  Ohio,  and 
‘  their  tributary  waters,  form  an  inland  navigation 
‘  exceeding  twenty  thousand  miles,  for  various 
‘  classes  of  boats,  during  two  thirds  of  the  year, 
‘  to  the  point  of  junction  at  Cairo;  from  thence  to 
‘  New  Orleans  the  river  is  navigable  for  the  whole 
‘  year  for  boats  of  the  largest  class.”  There  are 
broad  valleys  there;  mighty  lakes  and  rivers,  and 
beautiful  prairies;  mines  of  inexhaustible  wealth; 
mountains  of  iron;  vast  beds  of  lead,  zinc,  and 
copper,  and  “  coal  enough  to  keep  the  hearth  fires 
of  the  world  bright  for  a  thousand  centuries.”  But, 
sir,  there  is  also  there,  the  sure  and  durable  element 
of  wealth,  the  soil,  a  rich  and  productive  soil — a 
soil  producing,  with  little  labor,  and  in  great  abun¬ 
dance,  those  staple  articles  which  promote  the  sub¬ 
sistence,  as  well  as  constitute  the  commerce  of  the 
world.  Agriculture  produces  the  raw  material, 
commerce  distributes  it,  manufactures  prepare  it 
for  use.  But,  sir,  the  latter  depend  on  the  former. 
Agriculture  is  the  only  unfailing  basis  of  wealth. 
The  proudest  emporiums  are  liable  to  decay  by  the 
opening  of  new  ways  or  the  diversions  of  the 
channels  of  trade;  but  these  channels  of  trade,  go 
where  they  will,  they  depend  for  their  life-blood 
upon  the  productions  of  agriculture. 

‘‘While  trade’s  proud  empire  hastes  to  swift  decay, 
And  ocean  sweeps  the  labored  mole  away, 

This  self-dependent  power  shall  time  defy, 

As  rocks  resist  the  billows  and  the  sky.” 

The  West  is  progressing  rapidly  in  commercial 
prosperity.  In  the  year  1811  the  first  steam-boat 
was  launched  on  our  western  waters.  On  the  1st 
day  of  July,  1851,  there  were  on  the  inland  lakes 
and  rivers  seven  hundred  and  sixty-five  steam¬ 
boats,  with  an  average  tonnage  of  204,613,  and 
carrying  6,000,000  of  passengers,  and  with  an  ag¬ 
gregate  annual  commerce  of  $300,000,000,  exceed¬ 


ing  the  whole  amount  of  our  commerce  with  for¬ 
eign  nations. 

To  show  the  rapid  advance  and  relative  position 
of  the  West  in  the  construction  of  railroads,  I 
have  gleaned  the  following  statistics  from  a  table 
published  by  the  Railway  Times: 


In  the  United  States. 

Total  number  of  railroads .  337 

Number  of  miles  in  operation .  11,565 

Number  of  miles  in  course  of  construction. . .  11,228 

Cost  of  roads  completed . $335,150,848 

Average  cost  per  mile .  $28,979 

In  the  Valley  of  the  Mississippi. 

Total  numbersof  railroads .  103 

Miles  in  operation .  2,826 

Miles  in  course  of  construction .  7,506 

Cost  of  roads  completed .  $50,531,435 

Cost  per  mile .  $17,845 

In  Illinois. 

Total  number  of  roads .  18 

Miles  in  operation .  246 

In  course  of  construction .  2,246 


Thus  it  appears  that  the  West  has  already  one 
third  as  many  roads  as  all  the  States,  and  nearly 
three  fourths  of  all  the  roads  in  the  course  of  con¬ 
struction  in  the  whole  Union. 

Mr.  Chairman,  the  population  of  the  Valley  of 
the  Mississippi  already  constitutes  more  than  one 
third  of  the  entire  population  of  the  Union.  And, 
sir,  the  time  is  not  distant  when  the  seat  of  em¬ 
pire,  the  strong-hold  of  numerical  power,  will 
be  west  of  the  Alleghanies.  The  handwriting  is 
on  the  wall.  It  is  manifest  destiny,  sir.  It  is  writ¬ 
ten  on  the  signs  of  the  times  in  clear,  fresh,  and 
unmistakable  lines.  And  then,  sir,  her  Repre¬ 
sentatives  will  stand  on  this  floor  clothed  with  the 
power  to  demand,  and  not  to  beg,  like  crouching 
mendicants,  for  justice.  But,  sir,  when  her  voice 
shall  be  potential  here,  I  believe,  and  trust,  it  will 
not  be  felt  in  partiality  or  oppression;  but  with  a 
high  and  patriotic  regard  for  the  interests  of  the 
whole  country,  she  will  sympathize  with,  and 
cheerfully  cooperate  in,  every  measure  for  the  com¬ 
mon  prosperity,  without  regard  to  section  or  local¬ 
ity.  She  will  then  try  and  establish  the  proposition , 
that  three  hundred  millions  of  commerce  on  the 
lakes  and  rivers  is  entitled  to  protection,  as  well 
as  the  same  amount  on  the  ocean;  and  that  the 
life  of  a  man  on  the  Mississippi  is  worth  at  least 
one  fifth  part  of  the  life  of  a  man  on  the  Atlantic. 

What  has  the  West  done?  Has  she  not  con¬ 
tributed  her  equal  share  to  the  support  of  the  Gov¬ 
ernment?  Has  she  not  cheerfully  voted  every  ap¬ 
propriation  for  the  support  of  the  Army,  Navy — 
for  the  protection  of  our  foreign  commerce — with¬ 
out  inquiring  what  particular  sections  it  was  most 
to  benefit?  And  when  the  country  has  required 
the  services  of  its  citizen  soldiery,  who  has  sought 
the  field  with  more  alacrity?  Let  the  history  of 
the  country  answer.  The  West  can  point  to 
many  a  battle- field  in  the  war  of  18] 2,  and  in  the 
Mexican  war,  which  will  stand  forever  as  the  im¬ 
perishable  monuments  of  the  prowess  of  her  sons. 
And  yet,  sir,  they  claim  only,  in  common  with 
their  countrymen  everywhere,  to  have  done  their 
duty,  and  nothing  more;  and  they  ask  only  equal 
consideration  at  the  hands  of  this  Government. 

THE  ROADS  THROUGH  ILLINOIS. 

Mr.  Chairman,  I  have  not  time  to  present  the 
claims  of  the  various  roads  for  which  grants  have 
been  asked,  and  which  pass  through  the  State  of 
Illinois.  The  Burlington  and  Lafayette  road,  the 


12 


extension  of  the  Alton  and  Sangamon  road  to 
Bloomington,  connecting  St.  Louis  and  Chicago  ' 
by  the  most  direct  line,  and  the  Cincinnati  and 
St.  Louis  road  are  most  important  thorough¬ 
fares;  and  when  these  measures  come  up,  I  will, 
if  I  can  get  the  floor,  present  their  claims  to  the 
best  of  my  ability.  1  would  not  have  the  com¬ 
mittee  infer  that  we  expect  to  get  grants  for  all  the 
roads  asked  for,  for,  as  Mr.  Douglas  said  in  the 
Senate,  this  is  out  of  the  question.  We,  of  course, 
will  expect  the  House  to  select  from  all  the  roads 
brought  before  it  such  as  present  the  strongest 
claims  to  the  consideration  of  Congress.  As  the 
bill  introduced  by  my  friend  from  Indiana  [Mr. 
Davis]  will  probably  first  come  up  for  consider¬ 
ation,  I  will  say  a  few  words  as  to  the  route  it  I 
proposes.  This  is  an  extension  of  the  Hannibal 
and  St.  Joseph  road  eastward  to  Terre  Haute. 
From  the  Mississippi  to  the  Illinois  rivers  a  road 
is  now  in  process  of  construction.  From  the  Illi¬ 
nois  river  to  Springfield  a  road  has  been  in  oper¬ 
ation  for  several  years.  It  is  now  proposed  to 
grant  alternate  sections  of  the  public  lands  for  six 
miles  on  each  side  of  the  road,  to  extend  it  to  Terre 
Haute,  a  distance  of  one  hundred  miles.  From 
Terre  Haute  to  Indianapolis  a  road  is  in  opera¬ 
tion,  and  thence  to  Columbus  a  road  is  in  pro¬ 
cess  of  construction,  and  from  this  pointa  choice 
of  routes  can  be  shortly  had  to  any  of  the  Eastern 
cities.  The  importance  of  this  road  can  be  seen  at 
a  glance.  St.  Joseph,  Quincy,  Springfield,  In- 
dianoplis,  Columbus,  and  Philadelphia  are  all  on 
the  parallel  of  latitude  forty,  running  through  the 
geographical  center  of  all  these  States,  equidistant 
from  the  lakes  on  the  north  and  the  rivers  on 
the  south,  through  the  finest  agricultural  districts 
in  the  world;  it  is  the  short,  central,  and  conve¬ 
nient  route  of  the  cities  of  the  East  to  the  Missis¬ 
sippi  and  the  Missouri,  and  at  a  future  day,  to  the 
Pacific  ocean.  I  verily  believe  that  this  is  the 
route  which  is  destined  to  bear  on  its  long  lines 
that  majestic  procession  of  the  commerce  of  the 
continents  of  Europe,  America,  and  Asia.  Per¬ 
haps  not-  a  century  will  elapse  before  the  citi¬ 
zens  of  Springfield,  Illinois,  will  see  in  the  same 
train  of  cars  the  merchant  of  Liverpool,  New 
York,  San  Francisco,  and  Pekin;  and  that  trade 
which  built  up  Babylon  and  enriched  Holland, 
and  which  has  been  the  theme  of  British  eloquence 
for  centuries,  will  find  its  natural  channel  over  the 
Rocky  Mountains  and  the  prairies  of  the  West. 

Mr.  Chairman,  I  shall  conclude  what  I  have  to 
say  by  expressing  the  hope  that  in  our  legislation 
upon  the  public  lands  we  will  not  be  governed  by 
the  narrow  considerations  of  sectional  jealousy. 
Are  the  railroads  for  which  we  ask  grants,  for  the 
benefit  alone  of  any  particular  section?  Do  they 
not  open  new  and  profitable  markets  for  your 
cities?  Are  they  not  outlets  for  your  merchan¬ 
dise  and  the  fabrics  of  your  manufactories?  And 
do  they  not  bring  the  productions  of  the  mighty 
West,  cheapened  and  in  greater  abundance  to 
your  doors?  Do  they  not  freight  your  own  roads 
and  canals,  build  up  your  cities,  and  laden  your  ! 
ships  with  the  cargoes  of  valuable  commerce?  A 
railroad  in  Illinois,  like  a  light-house  on  the  sea- 
coast,  is  the  common  property  of  the  nation. 
Shall  we  adopt  the  policy  that  we  will  pass  no  | 
measure  unless  it  confers  equal  benefits  on  every 
section  of  the  country?  Then,  sir,  we  can  pass 
none.  Then,  sir,  stop  all  appropriations  for  cus- 1 


tom-houses,  ocean  steamers,  and  coast  surveys; 
for  these  add  to  your  wealth,  these  make  your 
merchant  princes,  these  swell  the  sails  of  your  f 
commerce,  while  we  share  their  benefits  in  an  in¬ 
direct  and  incidental  way  only.  But  I  trust,  Mr. 
Chairman,  the  West  will  never  oppose  an  appro¬ 
priation  for  the  “  general  welfare  or  common  de¬ 
fense,”  because  the  locality  of  that  appropriation  *1 
may  receive  especial  advantage  from  it.  What¬ 
ever  benefits  the  East  or  South  is  our  benefit — if 
not  for  our  benefit,  it  is  for  the  nation,  and  that’s 
enough.  The  ocean  steamer  that  plows  the  deep, 
it  is  enough  for  us  that  she  bears  aloft  our  stars 
and  stripes,  and  displays  to  the  world  the  com¬ 
merce,  power,  and  renown  of  our  country.  It  is 
enough  for  us  that  she  bears  the  trident  of  the 
seas,  and  outstrips  the  power 

11  Whose  flag  has  braved  a  thousand  years 
The  battle  and  the  breeze.” 

Away,  then,  sir,  forever  away  with  arguments 
like  those  of  the  gentleman  from  New  York,  [Mr. 
Bennett,]  addressed  to  our  sectional  prejudices 
and  local  cupidity.  We  have  one  country;  our 
interests  are  one,  our  history  is  one;  our  destiny 
is  the  same — a  glorious  destiny  of  free  and  sover¬ 
eign  States  to  unexampled  power  and  renown. 

The  same  flag  that  flashes  its  stars  to  the  sun  on 
the  banks  of  the  Hudson  and  Potomac  is  hailed 
by  millions  of  rejoicing  freemen  on  the  banks  of 
the  Mississippi  and  the  Columbia. 

Mr.  Chairman,  I  confess  I  was  delighted  the 
other  day  at  the  vivid  description  given  by  the 
gentleman  from  New  York  [Mr.  Brooks]  of  the 
extent  of  our  newly-acquired  possessions,  and  the 
vast  area  of  our  country.  Within  the  last  five 
years  three  new  States  have  been  added  to  the 
Union,  and  there  is  the  territory  at  the  head  of  the 
Missouri  and  the  Arkansas,  the  Territories  of  Ne¬ 
braska,  New  Mexico,  Utah,  and  Oregon — and  the 
vision  of  an  ocean-bound  Republic  is  now  a  reality. 

Sir,  what  a  mighty  theater  for  American  enter¬ 
prise  !  What  a  mighty  course  for  the  race  of  dem¬ 
ocratic  liberty  ! 

The  gentleman  from  New  York  informed  us 
that  we  had  upon  the  frontiers  an  army  of  12,311 
men,  118  military  posts,  and  6,800  miles  of  fron¬ 
tier  requiring  our  protection.  Now,  sir,  who  can 
doubt  that  railroads,  enabling  us  to  concentrate  at 
given  points  our  Army  and  munitions  of  war  at  the 
shortest  notice,  will  be  a  more  reliable  and  surer 
defense  than  thousands  of  military  posts  and  forti¬ 
fications?  And,  sir,  when  we  have  united  the 
Atlantic  and  the  Mississippi,  our  oceans,  lakes,  and 
rivers,  by  these  iron  bands  of  commerce,  we  shall 
have  stronger  and  more  impregnable  bonds  of 
union  “  than  all  the  constitutions  which  man  ever 
formed.”  This,  sir,  will  be  a  new  era — an  era, 
not  only  of  commerce,  which  is  an  exchange  of 
commodities,  but  also  of  the  exchange  of  ideas, 
the  rapid  transmission  of  thought — the  birth  of  a 
literature  commensurate  with  this  mighty  theater 
of  action — a  progression  in  science,  art,  and  po¬ 
litical  economy  and  diplomacy  pari  passu  with  this 
new  power  of  locomotion.  Wherever  the  iron 
horse  travels,  he  will  carry,  not  only  the  rich  pro¬ 
ductions  of  our  soil,  but  our  laws,  our  liberty,  and 
our  religion.  Flying  over  the  rivers  and  moun¬ 
tains  and  wild  deserts,  it  will  realize  the  bright 
vision  of  Isaiah:  “  The  valleys  shall  be  exalted,  the 
mountains  laid  low,  and  straight  in  the  desert, 
shall  be  made  a  highway  for  our  God.” 


13 


It  is  already  our  boast  as  a  nation,  sir,  that  we 
enjoy  more  of  liberty,  a  more  universal  diffusion 
of  knowledge,  and  a  more  exalted  national  char¬ 
acter  than  any  nation  on  the  globe.  But  the  stri¬ 
king  feature  of  the  American  character  is  its  en¬ 
terprise — an  enterprise  that  knows  no  obstacles, 
counts  no  costs,  fears  no  dangers,  triumphs  over 
all  obstacles.  Look  at  California — three  thousand 
miles  away  in  the  wild  deserts,  and  mountains 
and  savages  between.  And  yet,  sir,  a  young 
empire  is  there — a  sovereign  State,  she  has  her 
Representative  on  this  floor,  who  delights  us  with 
his  eloquence;  and  who,  to  quote  my  friend  from 
Kentucky,  [Mr.  Breckinridge,]  is  ready  to  turn 
the  world  upside  down  with  his  brilliant  notions 
of  “  young  fogyism,”  “young  America,”  and 
“  manifest  destiny.” 

But,  sir,  the  most  felicitous  thought  is  now,  that 
the  fears  of  disunion  growing  out  of  the  increased 
extension  of  territory  no  longer  alarms  the  patriot. 
It  will  be  no  matter  how  far  Charleston  is  from 
New  York  when,  sir,  they  can  have  constant 
communication  with  each  other  in  a  few  days. 
Rome,  by  her  military  powers,  spread  her  empire  ' 


J  over  the  world;  and  her  eagles  winged  their  tri¬ 
umphant  flight  over  conquered  provinces;  but  these 
;  provinces  were  beyond  the  reach  of  the  Roman 
lawgiver.  The  eloquence  of  Cicero  thundered  in 
the  forum,  but  it  reached  no  further  than  the  ears 
of  the  conscript  fathers  and  the  Roman  populace. 
But  not  so  with  us,  when  the  message  of  the 
President  can  be  read  in  the  most  distant  State  on 
the  day  of  its  delivery.  Not  so  with  us,  when 
we  travel  by  steam,  print  by  electricity,  and  talk 
by  lightning. 

Then,  sir,  with  the  proper  application  of  the  re¬ 
sources  that  belong  to  us,  and  a  faithful  develop¬ 
ment  of  the  true  principles  of  our  freedom,  we 
may  look  forward,  fearless  of  disunion,  to  the 
magnificent  destiny  which  awaits  us, — a  nation 
renowned  in  arts  and  arms,  her  institutions  of  be¬ 
nevolence  and  public  works  the  wonder  of  the 
world — her  republican  example  the  beacon  light 
to  light  up  the  world  to  freedom ! 

Mr.  Chairman,  I  see  that  my  time  is  about  ex¬ 
pired,  and  I  close  by  thanking  the  committee  for 
the  attention  it  has  accorded  me  to  what  I  have 
offered  for  its  consideration. 


4 


i 


